REMEDIAL LAW REVIEWER FOR THE 2014 OCTOBER BAR EXAMS: BLITZ NOTES:A motion for intervention, like any other motion, has to comply with the mandatory requirements of notice and hearing, as well as proof of its service, save only for those that the courts can act upon without prejudice to the rights of the other parties. A motion which fails to comply with these requirements is a worthless piece of paper that cannot and should not be acted upon. The reason for this is plain: a movant asks the court to take a specific course of action, often contrary to the interest of the adverse party and which the latter must then be given the right and opportunity to oppose. The notice of hearing to the adverse party thus directly services the required due process as it affords the adverse party the opportunity to properly state his agreement or opposition to the action that the movant asks for. Consequently, our procedural rules provide that a motion that does not afford the adverse party this kind of opportunity should simply be disregarded. The notice requirement is even more mandatory when the movant asks for the issuance of a preliminary injunction and/or a TRO. Under Section 5, Rule 58 of the Rules of Court, no preliminary injunction shall be granted without a hearing and without prior notice to the party sought to be enjoined. The prior notice under this requirement is as important as the hearing, as no hearing can meaningfully take place, with both parties present or represented, unless a prior notice of the hearing is given. Additionally, in the same way that an original complaint must be served on the defendant, a copy of the complaint-in-intervention must be served on the adverse party with the requisite proof of service duly filed prior to any valid court action. Absent these or any reason duly explained and accepted excusing strict compliance, the court is without authority to act on such complaint; any action taken without the required service contravenes the law and the rules, and violates the adverse partys basic and constitutional right to due process.(CITATIONS OMITTED SUPREME COURT DOCTRINAL DECISIONS) (TACORDA BIDO BERNABE DE LA VEGA NAPAY - LITUSQUEN & ISIDORO USB FILES )
Posted on: Tue, 04 Mar 2014 06:36:02 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015